Minutes of this american Artifacts Program by going to cspan. Org and searching stonewall riots. Right now we go live to capitol hill for a Senate Foreign relations hearing on the Coronavirus Response and what the u. S. Is doing to prepare for future Global Pandemics. The hearing will focus on senate bill 3829 with senator murphy and i have introduced. Its written on paper, not on stone, which well talk about a little bit in the future here. This is an important endeavor that this committee is going to take up, indeed. Probably one of the weightiest matters that well deal with as we attempt to create a new shield to prevent a covid virus type attack be from happening again. The covid19 Global Pandemic has reaffirmed what weve long known and that is Infectious Diseases, particularly those of viral nature, do not respect borders. Theyre a threat anywhere, its a threat everywhere. Weve been right here to focus on our domestic response to this pandemic, but we ignore the spread overseas at our own peril for obvious reasons. It is essential that we respond now to help our partners who are not yet experiencing significant spread to get testing, tracing and quarantine procedures in place and to help our partners who are already under siege avert a worse case scenario. We need to also focus on protecting access to food, livelihoods, water, sanitation and hygiene. Protecting existing investments in immunizations, maternal and child health and other Infectious Diseases are important at this times also. And we need to work with partner countries and organizations to ensure that our aid reaches those who need it most. Without aiding and abetting corruption, Human Rights Violations and democratic backsliding which we all know frooekly happens in the when we start focusing on Something Else. At the same time, we need to figure out how to get ahead of the next Global Pandemic. Indeed, thats what the focus of this hearing is going to be on. And again, the vehicle were talking about is senate bill 3829 but for discussion purposes and we look for every possible improvement to that bill that we can make. This hearing is one of a number that im going to undertake as we construct senate bill 3829 to go forward. The purpose of it is to, as i said, construct a shield that is better than the shield that we have. Ive repeatedly said that what we need is a fire station and a Fire Department ready and able to put out a fire before it burns the entire world. Over the years weve come to expect that the World Health Organization would play a role. The World Health Organization has done great work in many respects. It does play a key role as the guardian of the International Health regulations and is the Clearing House of Global Health data and best practices, and it has done remarkable work in combatting polio and eradicating smallpox, but its response to fastmoving emergencies such as ebola and covid19 has exposed significant weaknesses that the w. H. O. Has. We are not here to demean or to criticize or condemn the w. H. O. Rather, what were here to do is to have a fair analysis of what the response was and how their structure is constructed that has caused the weaknesses we have. Dr. Tedros and his Management Team were very kind to spend some time with me early on and they explained to me what their objectives were and how they were attempting to do. They made some very fair points and it truly is obvious that they did things that could have been done differently and they will be the first to admit that. In addition to reforming who and truly there is some reform thats needed and it should be done, as i said, without demeaning, criticizing or condemning, but rather in a the kindest way possible to make it work better. We need we need an International Financing mechanism that will reenergize action understand the Global Health security agenda to help countries with high commitment but low capacity to improve their pandemic preparedness and response. We need a longterm fix to the coordination problems that have long plagued u. S. Country teams operating overseas. We need a single, accountable entity housed at the department of state to lead diplomatic efforts and coordinate the efforts of the agencies implementing Global Health Security Assistance overseas. This accountable entity would not, i repeat not, replace the central role of the nsc in coordinating Global Health Security Policy across the whole of government here in washington. Alternatively, it would ensure the effectiveness of Global Health security programs at the mission he will level. We put these ideas forward in the bipartisan bill and have invited alls those who wish to participate to do so. This has to be a bipartisan effort. Its not too late to get back on track and restore the longstanding tra division bipartisanship that is characterized every successful u. S. Global Health Program of the past 20 years. Its not too late to focus our efforts on addressing the current covid19 pandemic overseas in a manner that savings lives and protects the United States from future waves of infection. But let there be no mistake about it, this bill is designed to look at the future. There is no doubt this is going to happen again. Weve been told that the population particular in the wuhan area in china contains about 2,000 viruseses. This, of course, the pandemic was caused by one of these viruses jumping from one species to another, from a bat to a human being. What happened after that has been greatly debated, but we know what the result was and we know that the result was not good and we know that there were failures along the line and we know we can do better. Theres no other group more qualified than this committee of the United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee to undertake this proposition. This is something that we owe america, we owe the world, and we can do this. Im committed to do that. I would hope that every member on the committee will help focus on this as one of the most important things that we do. It will be a legacy that will be incredibly important for future generations and we know that the world cannot withstand much more of what weve seen that we got from the covid19 infection that went through the world. With that i hope that we as a committee do what we try to do and that is focus with civility, kindness, understanding and tolerance as we hear from everyone. Were going to have a lot of different ideas. Theres going to be a lot of ideas that are that people have strong feelings on. I hope people will do their best to listen carefully to what others have to say and listen to defenses that people make to what has happened, but more importantly, listen carefully to what people tell us theyve learned that will help us in the future. In a bipartisan fashion thats done with kindness and civility, i have every confidence we can develop a bill that can pass this congress, be signed by the president , become law, and really be a tremendous benefit to our fellow human beings as we go forward. With that, ill turn the time to senator menendez. Thank you, mr. Chairman, for convening todays hearing. As you know i have been seeking a series of hearings on covid for quite some time and im pleased that we are now having one. I understand you intend to hold more and i strongly support that. Let me start by speaking to the larger concerns of the democratic minority recently wrote to you about. We must have serious and sustained focus on u. S. Foreign policy in a serious oversight agenda, and we want to work with you to make that happen. Mr. Chairman, we should be having more public hearings. We need to tackle some of the major challenges that confront us, afghanistan, venezuela, north korea, just to mention some. We need to ensure the secretary of state testifies before this committee. We should all be shocked and frankly offended that the secretary is refusing to appear, refusing to defend the administrations Foreign Affairs budget and we should all be insisting on his appearance. This could be the first time in over 20 years that a secretary of state has not testified before this committee to explain administration priorities. I guess after ambassador boltons book, we probably will never see him again. This lack of engagement fundamentally undermine our work, not only does the secretary of state feel comfortable in refusing to come before us, that refusal apparently extends to other Senate Confirmed officials. We have only heard from one Senate Confirmed official this entire year. The administration has repeatedly ignored oversight inquiries, many of them even bipartisan. We dont need to rehash the contentious vote on michael pack, but we should all be seriously concerned over what weve seen in the last 10 days and 24 hours at the u. S. Agency for global media. Mr. Pack has gone on a wholesale firing spree, removing the heads of the networks, dissolving their corporate boards to replace them with unqualified political people. Fundamentally undermining the mission and work of the organization. Its now obvious why the white house wanted pack so badly. So they can transform the agency into their own personal mouthpiece. This is a blow from which it may never recover. Once the credibility is gone, no one will ever trust a report from radio free europe, radio team nor trust the tools of the open technology fund. Mr. Chairman, i would just urge you to respond to the letter that we sent you in the spirit in which it was offered. On behalf of myself and all the democratic members of the committee i can tell you we want to work with you and we want to find Common Ground, we want the state department to be successful, and we want this committee to take on serious and meaningful work that will make an impact on the national and global stage. Lets Work Together to make that happen. While i thank all of our witnesses for their service, it is disappointing that the white house would not send a member of the Coronavirus Task force or any of the Senate Confirmed individuals from the state department, health and Human Services or the United States agency for International Development responsible for administrations response. The American People deserve to hear from members of the president s handpicked team to understand what it is doing to address the worst pandemic the world has faced in 100 years. More than 8 million cases worldwide, more than 115,000 american lives lost. In my own home state of new jersey, the second largest state in the nation in terms of covid deaths, i am vividly reminded of this consequence. This tragedy was assuredly a wake up call to those who questioned whether we should engage with and invest in the rest of the world. I would like to use this hearing to understand how we got here, what we knew about the virus and when, and how we are leveraging our diplomatic relationships and leadership to best respond and protect the American People. So far most of what weve seen is a lot of bluster, finger pointing and retrenchment. Yes, we should examine the World Health Organizations initial response. I wish we had someone from the state Departments Bureau of International Organizations to do exactly that. But we also know that u. S. Was regularly communicating with and receiving information from the w. H. O. , including through u. S. Government employees embedded at w. H. O. Headquarters in geneva. Rather than seriously consider how to best leverage our leadership and contributions, the president abruptly announced the u. S. Would pull out of the organization, threatening not just our ability to confront covid19, but risking decades of progress on other Global Health initiatives including combatting polio and ebola. And yes, china has a lot to answer for, but the administrations use of racially stigmatizing language to describe covid19 in direct contradiction has been hurtful to americans at home and utterly counterproductive in leading an International Response. The secretary of states insistence that the rest of the world agree to use such language has prevented us from reaching consensus at the g7 and in the security council. And while the white house engaging in divisive rhetoric, the rest of the world is stepping up without us. When chinese president xi jinping addressed the World Health Assembly in may he pledged 2 billion over two years to combat covid19. When secretary azar addressed the assembly he attacked the w. H. O. And cast blame on klein. The European Union held a pledging conference on vaccines last month in which over 8 billion was raised. The white house declined the invitation to participate for reasons that are beyond me. Is this what the Administration Means by America First . Well, if this Eu Consortium comes up with a vaccine before we do it will mean america last. This approach is not only isolationist, shortsighted and foolish, it endangers american lives. As the old saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Im all for ensure the u. S. Government is better organized to prevent, detect, and respond to future pandemics both here and abroad, but some of the proposals coming out of the administration eerily similar to those coming from some members of congress, are ill thought, destructive and dangerous and they would cripple usaid and create a mechanism at the world bank for which the administration could channel all the funding withholding from the w. H. O. I look forward to the first of what i hope are many thorough discussions. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. We will now now proceed to do exactly what i said we were going to do and that is examine this with an eye towards constructing a shield for the future. Of course that fluid does require some discussion over what happened and mow we got here. But nonetheless im hoping we will continue to focus the discussion just to senator murphy and my bill has done, senate bill 2839 and that is look forward. So with that we have a distinguished fanl today, certainly woem with outstanding knowledge in this area who can help us understand the task at hand and how we can accomplish that task. So first of all we have mr. James richardson who serves as director at the office of foreign asestitance where he coordinates 35 billion of foreign assistance across the department of state. He has 20 years of government experience and holds a bachelors in science and government, a masters in science and strategic students and is a graduate of the United States air force command. Mr. Richardson, thank you so much. Give us the benefit of your wisdom. Thank you, chairman and members of this committee. Thank you for inviting me to testify on this pandemic. I look forward to having this opportunity to have a dialogue and answer any of your questions. First i need to acknowledge the leadership of President Trumpverb Vice President pence, secretary pompeo and really the myriad of teams we have all around the world that stayed in usaid working torggether. We coordinate foreign assistance on behalf of the secretary. As the chairman mentioned prior to that i was at u said looking for ways to strengthen the power of development and improve the institution. As such i believe deeply in the power of development and diplomacy. But together i think they can be unstoppable. The United States is the worlds undisputed leader in foreign assistance. Weve invested 500 billion over the past 20 years. 140 of that in the United States alone. Covid has posed a unique challenge to the United States and the entire world as you know impacting both high income and developing countries alike. The numbers speak for themselves. The state department has received nearly 1,000 requests from almost every country in the world. In the face of covid the generosity of the American People has been on full display with more than 12 billion in financial, humanitarian, scientific to dcombat the crisi. This money is being well spent. We have committed so far 1. 3 billi 1. 3 billion of that and our assistance has gone to 123 countries. Weve trained 20,000 front line workers in india. We funded Public Health Service Announcements on how to fight the virus in more than 50 languages. State and usaid has undertaken impressive coordination in the covid19. That coordination that not slowed us down but ensured alignment for our resources. Well, the covid19 pandemic is certainly not over i firmly believe that we need to start thinking about today what systems the u. S. And the world needs to lessen the likelihood of another outbreak becoming a Global Pandemic. Whether looking across this pandemic of the pasts i think we can pull some important Lessons Learned, but the bottom line up front is that moving forward i hope we can all agree that more data, more coordination and more response functions are necessary to future outbreaks and prevent pandemics. So the first Lesson Learned is that pandemics arent just a Development Challenge or confine today the developing world. For instance, of the countries with the highest percentage of covid related deaths almost none of them have u. S. Government bilateral Global Health programs. As such u. S. Leadership needs to not just focus on the development piece which is critically important but have a broader scope focusing on mobilizing countries own yours, burn and sharing with like minded donors and building true accountability into the gloel smgs. The second lesson is the u. S. Government and global system must be prepared to respond internationally. As i often say true coordination is not about control. Its about empowerment. We have to unleash the power of our diplomacy, of our development, of our Public Health efforts so in order to maximize our impact. We also need to ensure that the global struckertures can effectively prevent and contain outbreaks from becoming epidemic and pandemic. The third is there third need Early Warning systems and Data Tracking. We understand that the challenges we may face can come in many different forms and our response will ultimately be multif mul multif multifaceted. We have an opportunity to save lives, promote accountability and ensure pandemics are prevented. We need to fill the gaps in the system while yacoordinating and leveraging the unique strengths of each aspect of u. S. Government. Time and time again when theres a gloeblt challenge americans lead. Were the worlds greatest humanitarians that the world has ever seen, and im committed to working with all of you to strengthen this fact. Thank you for having me today, and look forward to your questions in this important conversation. Thanks so much. Great comments. Mr. Milligan serve as as Senior Development advisor for the first diplomatic review, Senior Deputy for policy and learning. He has a master degree of John Hopkins School of International Stud squez is a distinguished graduate of national or college. Thank you for coming. Wed like to hear what you have to say. It is really an honor to be here today. And let me begin first by thanking you for your generosity which has allowed the United States agency for International Development to mount a robust response to the covid19 pandemic. I have been a Foreign Service officer at usaid for more than 30 years and currently serve as a counselor. And throughout my career i have seen the United States respond to crises all over the world, i have led some responses myself. Including the outbreaks of ebola in west africa, zika in latin america and the caribbean. We are continuing to fight ebola and we are in this fight for the longterm because that is what we do and who we are as americans. Through these experiences usaid has developed deep operational and Technical Expertise to respond quickly, rapidly and appropriately to complex health crises. The United States government is strongest when we are agile and well coordinated particularly at the country level. I know from my own experience out of control epidemic are a symptom of multiple conflict causes and Health Emergencies have consequences that can rapidly require Broader Development of systems to address those deeper root causes of instability and poor governance. Controlling epidemics requires more than a stand alone effort. And we have seen when we do not address poor governance and conflict we wipeout the investments in health and education and other basic surfaces. Usaid has experience to dreeszthies issues and prevent outbreaks from becoming epidemic, but we are hammered. We are hampered when countries do not disclose information trance apparently or share pathogen samples and instead destroy samples and obfuscate facts. In stark contract usaid builds capacity and strengthens the Health System and Democratic Institutions to enable countries themselves to respond. And that protects us back home. We appreciate your support to make these investments ourselves based on data and the best available evidence. Today faced with covid19 the United States is again demonstrating clear and decisive leadership. Usaid is investing 1. 2 billion generously appropriated by congress to finance health care, humanitarian assistance, economic and stabilization efforts worldwide. This funding is saving lives and also improving Public Health education and protecting Health Workers and supporting disease surveillance and boosting Rapid Response capacity in over 100 countries around the world. We recognize covid19 will have extensive secondary and tertiary impacts. We must empower our health experts. Sphawe are very concerned about these secondary and tertiary impacts. Were concerned about the more than 113 million people. Were seeing a disturbing trend of a rolling back of democratic reform and democratic backsliding, closing its face to civil society. Were investing not only in Food Security but also in combating this democratic backsliding. It contributes to the United States remaining a trusted and preferred partner in countries around the world. No other country can match our unparalleled generosity, our longterm commitment to help during the selfrescience so that is why i greatly appreciate the ability to testify today in this committee. Thank you. The director of the office offense Global Affairs at the department of health and Human Services. You previously served as usaid director for conflict and humanitarian assistance. And as deputy staff director for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. With that, were anxious to hear what you have to say about our relationship with w. H. O. And moving forward. Thank you, sir. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member menendez, and members of the committee its an honor to be with you to discuss the World Health Organization and the agenda or gsa. Last month secretary azar addressed w. H. O. s governing body expressing concerns to the covid19 outbreak. The committee is aware of the president s statements in a letter expressing his concerns in a may 29th statement that the United States is terminating its relationship with w. H. O. With respect to w. H. O. Allow me to go back even before the first reporting in wuhan,ine chooena, and address the concerns and then ill address gsa. The International Health regulations or ihrs were revised in 2005 to improve transparency and reinforce obligations of countries to provide accurate, timely and complete information about outbreaks. After the 2014 and its had some success on the ground responding to complex emergencies, but it has not met the Global Challenge of covid19. 14 years after sars, china failed again to provide accurate, timely and kpleetd information to w. H. O. About its covid19 outbreak. And in fact withheld information that could have helped countries take actions earlier to protect Public Health. W. H. O. Did not call out the Chinese Government which we believe exacerbated the pandemic. Earlier statements praise said the Chinese Government while criticizing others. When missteps of china and w. H. O. Became apparent our team compiled information to identify gaps in w. H. O response tool kit. For example, w. H. O. s director general must demand kplieps with ihr obligations. The director general and w. H. O. s selfEmergency Program must be insulated from maligned political pressure. Improvements to the process for declaring a Public Health emergency of International Concern are overdue. And linking travel and trade restrictions together must be reexamined so countries can take proactive measures like the u. S. Did to protect our citizens without criticism or retaliation. Enacting these reforms regardless of the United States relationship with w. H. O. Would be good for the world. The w. O. Will only live up to its mandate with increase transparency and accountability of all Member States. Switching to the Global Health security agenda 18 months into phase two called ghsa 2014, the need for multiseck toral approach to preparedess is greater now than ever. Ghsa was created in the midst of the 2014 west ebola crisis to help countries comply with the ihrs. Its a group of 67 countries, International Organizations, ngos, and Companies Working together to prepare for infectious disease. Under ghsa america made commitments to respond to Infectious Diseases as a national priority. Ghsa members provide support for implementation through advocacy, collaboration, information sharing and technical advice. The u. S. Is a leading voice on the ghsa 2024 steering group. As chair of the accountability and results task force ensuring the focus on addressing gaps and challenges in the countries. The target is to have more than a hundred companies with improved capacities by 2024. It seeks to improve accountability and tracks Partner Commitments in a transparent manner. We also collaborate with partners to mobilize resources for preparedness. Hhs works with many country to improve Health Security this including helping develop a joint evaluation, developing action plans and mobilizing resources. As ghsa core capacities are based on the International Health regulations both efforts i discussed leading ghsa 2024 and forging ahead on reforms focused on strengthening the ihrs are mutually enforcing and will help bring about a safer world. We look forward to working with the committee on Global Health security. Thanks to all of you. Certainly looks like weve got the right panel here to give us the information we need to try to go forward. Let me say first of all let me remind you how critical and pivotal the United States role is in any kind of a Global Challenge. And most importantly how generous the americans are. The 330 million of us compared to 8 billion in the world contribute a High Percentage of the aid given to less fortunate people. You made one statement that id like to focus on a little bit, and im going to follow up on this also. You said you feared future pandemics are going to look like this than the one we experienced in the past. Your thought . Could you drill down on that a little bit . Why do you say that and what do you mean by that . I appreciate the question, senator. I think when we start looking what is the real difference between this pandemic and whether its ebola or sars both of those were fairly recognized in scope. The challenges that they presented were probably overwhelmingly focused on it developing world. And this pandemic i think given the globalization realities we find, the fact we can easily travel around the world and thats continuing to accelerate, i fear that mobility will drive epidemics or outbreaks somewhere to then be able to be spread more easily through the developed world nirgz to tin ad the developing world. Let me stop you there. As i look at these things the transmission mechanism is different on the wtwo, it seems to be. With 2,000 viruses kicking around out there theyre probably all going to have ind yo si id idiosyncrasies different to others. When you look at the challenge were presented with, the globalization of this world and ability for viruses to quickly move outside of containment area, thats a game changer. And again, given the fact its been able to impact the high Income Countries like the way it has i think really makes us want to rethink how we approach this. Thats what were trying to right here and thats the focus of exactly what were doing. I think your identification there is is important. In a minute im going to ask a little bit more about that because of the system we need to put in place. It seems to me that covid19 because of the way it transmitted and the rapidity is so different than the other things weve had in the past. And in defense of the systems were trying to respond to this they werent ready for that. They expected it would behave like sars or like ebola or Something Like that. And what we found out is that it behaved very differently and required a very different response, and that didnt happen. Is that a correct characterization . No, absolutely. Were not really sure what the next outbreak or next virus will look like or what it will do. I think ill leave it to the scientists to talk about how its transmitted or how much more it can move easily, but i think our systems are not built for this type of outbreak leading to this type. The didnt work, right . So it did not stop the ability for this to become a Global Pandemic. That is able to say, you know, regardless of what the virus is or regardless of where the outbreak starts and where it goes we need to have an ability to respond. And this idea of a worldwide ability to respond is incredibly critical. Well, and thats what senator murphy and i and this committee are focused on as far as trying to develop this system here and thanks for being part of that. In my conversations with mr. Tedros and his team they were defensive in one respect, i think it was legitimate and that is they said they did want have enough power. And regardless of our criticism of them we do have to realize theyre not a sovereign entity and they cant really tell a sovereign entity what to do. They can certainly encourage them and press them to do the right thing. But it struck me along with this conversation i was just having with mr. Richardson that they as much as the rest of the world were taken aback by how covid19 reacted compared to their dealings with polio or aids or ebola or Something Like that. Is that a Fair Assessment of where they were as far as taken aback by what happened . Thank you, mr. Chairman. You know, its fair to say as james was alluding to covid19 was a novel virus. Its one that had not been seen within human beings tomorrow. Theres still a lot were learning about it. And by the way wed be happy to come up and brief you and myself, not myself but we have leading scientists in the world. They are still learning about this. I think thats a fair comment, and it is true and that is a challenge that the World Health Organization does not have a police force. It does not have a Standing Army to go in and enforce the International Health obligations which is only one of two treaties that are in the wshs h. O. , countries have signed up to and are applied to comply with. But i think what we all know is that rather than even calling china out the leadership of w. H. O. Was praising china. This has happened before. Weve been in this movie before. We can go back to the sars situation early 2000s. The leadership of the w. H. O. Was a little bit more boulder when it called china. There were significant problems that happened that led as i mentioned in my statement to a revision of the International Health regulations in 2005, but theres only so much it can do. But it didnt even do the minimum it could have done as in calling out what was really going on, the information that it needed, that it was not receiving. That didnt happen at all, unfortunately. Thank you. Im going to end here and turn it over to senator menendez. I want you to think about we focus quite a bit on what didnt happen and why it didnt. And what i would like to hear when i come back is i want your thoughts on what a system would look like to if we were designing it now which we are hopefully for the next pandemic that has the transmission is rapidly and as easily as covid19. I think we all now agree this is totally different from what we have dealt with this in the past. We need a system different and we want your thoughts on that how we would go forward. Senator menendez. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Just to comment i agree we need to continue working on a bipartisan approach. Before the last business meeting we were working well on a bipartisan managers package, jllong with all the other democrats on the committee introduced the covid19 International Response and recovery act and hope we can find a Common Ground, a productive path forward and i look forward to that opportunity. I want to pickoff in your last set of comments here as well as your testimony that china did not share sufficient information about the virus and you just said the w. H. O. s words praised for china actually exacerbated the pandemic because it did not push china to be more trance pirnts. But President Trump quite explicitly in one tweet january 24th he wrote china has been working very hard to contain the cboe. The United States greatly appreciates their efforts and transparency. It will all work out well. Inl particular on behalf of the American People i want to thank president xi, closed quote. On february 6th at the w. H. O. Executive Board Meeting ambassador brenburg who represented the United States was similarlily effusive saying, quote, we deeply appreciate all china is doing on behalf of his own people and ahead. Those are just some of the quotes. So was the w. H. Os praise for china the flaw . And if so why did the United States make similar statements of praise and support for china at the same time this was detrimental to the Global Pandemic response . Thank you, senator. The comments you made are absolutely correct. Early on the information we were receiving is china was being cooperative. We were getting those reports from the World Health Organization. I remember having conversations early on at my level and members of the w. H. O. Telling me how unbelievably transparent china was being particularly compared to the sars problem of early 2000s. What happened is we received more information laert as we all have and information continuing to come out. And as that information changed the tone changed. Thats just a fair comment. Last month the World Health Assembly approved a resolution. Its cosponsored by in fact, because it was a Virtual Assembly and much condenseda opposed to the normal meetings we werent able to do a lot of business. They had one item and that is a resolution cosponsored by 140 countries expressing concern but also demanding there be an independent review of what happened including about the origins of the disease. So a lot of countries were saying good things early on and moring information has come out i look forward to the review and i certainly believe its important, but the president s praise continued even after the ones i mentioned. Let me ask you this. You listed several reforms the administration would like to see at the w. H. O. Including pressure for better compliance of International Health regulation obligations and improving the process for declaring Public Health emergencies of International Concern. That would be good for the world. But the director general is not the person who decides on those reforms. Its the w. H. O. , which is a member organization. Member countries make those decisions. How does the United States expect to influence other members to achieve reform at the w. H. O. If if has relinquished its seat at the table . Senator, thats a good question and i appreciate it. The fact of the matter is the United States is a member of the World Health Organization now. The president has announced that that relationship is being terminated and if i said im terminating my relationship with you, why should i listen to you . Can you explain that to me . Why should i listen to you about anything i want to do about the Organization Im no longer going to have a relationship with . Why dont i tell you what were actually doing. No, why dont you answer my question . Im doing that, sir. As you know the United States has the presidency of the g7. This year theyve provided us an opportunity to speak with health ministries. In fact, secretary azar has in fact early on in the pandemic has once a week telephone conversations with all Health Ministers of the g7. As the situation with covid19 became more apparent there was a focus on reform of the w. H. O. Those conversations continue, and some of the countries have asked us the same question. Its in the interest of the United States whether or not were a member of the w. H. O. To have a w. H. O. That performs better. We well, i appreciate your lengthy answer which is nonanswer as far as im concerned. Youve not made it clear to me how youre going to effect change at the w. H. O. If we create a new Global Trust Fund at the world bank as i understand it from reading the bill thats what it would do would we just be going to alone . The rest of the world may be seeking change at the w. H. O. But theyre behind the w. H. O. Lep me understand why other countries would support a new mechanism at the world bank . Wouldnt this create a parallel mechanism to the World Health Organization . Senator, we just received a copy of the bill a couple of days ago and i know our team is look at that. I dont know that that will be the case. In terms of for example hiv aids there are multiple organizations created and i believe the senators proposal would be in that same spirit. I look forward to your further analysis of the bill because thats what it seem tuesday me. Let me close. Mr. Richardson, i know youve talked about the generosity of the United States. I would just say if i looked at the president s proposals for global fiscal year 2020 which is more than a 20 decrease in the Foreign Affairs budget including a budget cut at aig and department of state and similarly the if cuts include a 30 reduction to the state department and usaid had they enacted the u. S. Would have 7 billion less to spend on humanitarian assistance. So to theects tent the American People have been generous and they have it is because the congress of the United States has put forward these funds. Not buzz because that the administration has proposed it. And i have serious concerns, which ill wait for the second round as it relates to the actual delays in the obligation of critical humanitarian aid. Weve heard from many partners up to ten weeks in delay. I dont think theres a good reason for that but i look forward to explaining to you. This is a crisis that is really driven by and really defined by certain data points, certain mechrics. Moving forward and were going to poiresponded metrically, if look at recent passed viruses, different outbreaks, h1n1 about 600 million americans affected by that, 200 million globally, and ebola i think less than 50,000 people have been infected with ebola. Merz was i think about 2,500 people. About 22 saitary rate and by 10 the fatality rate. Sf the same that early on in december when this first surfaced in china the who was looking at this, dr. Fauci looking at this, we were happening that this type of new virus would be something similar on the order of mers and sars where it might be pretty deadly but it wasnt going to spread that much. How quickly can we obtain information on the transmission rate in a new virus weve never seen before . Senator, i think you hit upon the problem and i sort of wish dr. Fauci was here to answer your question. He could be more knowledgeable than i am. But, again, the point is that it was a novel coronavirus, and there are other coronaviruses weve dealt with. Sars is another example, so thats really the only thing you can go back and look at. But covid19 is not sars. It behaves differently but you dont know that until you get into it. And frankly the signs are still learning more about it and will be im sure for years. That makes it very difficult to respond to. Ebola is a scary thing. The mortality rate is high. Its very difficult to deal with. But at some point theres been a lot of experience in dealing with that. There have been new tools created like a vaccine thats effective and therapeutics that are effective. Early on that wasnt the case but once you deal with these things you become better at it, learn more about it and thats what were in the process of doing. Weve now seen the economic devastation caused by global and national shutdowns. I think were starting to understand that the devastating human toll of whats happened to our economies, early on these models, for example, i read the reports but the one that really drove so many of these shutdowns in the first report the introductory summary estimated 7 billion people would contract coronavirus. Isnt that an impossibility . I confess to you, sir, i am not an expert on those models. Wed be happy to bring up those folks and talk to your staff. Theres a whole industry that deals with these modelings. I guess my point being i think what models do we rely onto drive policy we need to take a serious look tat that. And we needs to take a serious look what drove so much of this economic devastation. And eventually well find out what the infections tally rate is. Right now theyre saying theyre going to be anywhere between 0. 1 and 0. 41 . A blad susan is about 4. 8. If were moving forward we need to identify these metrics, the drive, the type of policy first of all to address the Health Situation but also understand whats happening with our economy as we employ these shutdowns. Youre right, senator. And again i would go back to the fact this is a novel coronavirus, something that had not been seen in humans before. Sole some of it is eicated guesswork, no doubt about it. We have Early Warning tracking systems thats an existing program run out of usaid thats phenomenal, but we dont have effective Warning Systems and Data Tracking systems for outbreaks going into a pandemic. This is huge vulnerability and a gap in the strategic system and its not a gap concernly filled by the w. H. O. Or any other system out there and its something i think we need to look at. Thank you for bring this into the area of the economics. Its certainly something that needs to be considered and the metrics that need to be looked at, too. Senator kaine. Reporter thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you to the witnesses. I want to follow up on senator johnsons data and ask you some questions about data. So on january 21st the United States and south korea both had their first case, reported case of coronavirus. An that day the Unemployment Rate in both nations was fairly similar. It was 4 in south korea, and 3. 5 in the United States. On march 3rd we had a hearing in this room i believe with a Health Committee hearing, not a forlingen Relations Committee hearing with a number of the political appointees experiencing controversy. The unemployment in both nations is also essentially similar. Today south korea has lost 280 people to coronavirus and the United States has lost now more than 119,000. The south korean Unemployment Rate has risen to 4. 8 while the u. S. Unemployment rate has risen to 13. 3 . South korea has one sixth of the population of the United States. Their gdp is one twelve that of the United States. South korea is every bit as misaffect by the missteps and more importantly affected by the chinese missteps because of the frequency of travel between china and south korea. Even with vastly greater rurss the United States now has a covid19 death rate per 1 47b,000 population. That is 8 0e tim0 times higher that in south korea. I know four people who died of coronavirus. And our economy has been devastated by this crisis in a way South Koreans are not. On a hearing on International Response i think its important to look at other nations and ask what did they get right that we got so wrong . So id like to ask our panel how can america and the entire world replicate the more successful strategy that south korea or other nations, japan, canada, germany, australia, new zealand, vietnam utilized as we go forward in fighting covid19 and preparing the next pandemic . Senator, im happy to start out. I think that a lot of many years are going to be spent taking a look at Lessons Learned. The World Health Organization just approved a resolution to take the first steps to do the first one. Is that a good thing . You support that . Yes, we did. In fact we negotiated the eu, sponsored it. We worked very closely with them to ensure that language was in fact in there and was not weakened by other states seeking to weaken that language and there were 140 other cosponsors. I have no doubt in our country there will be countless studies looking at this, and there will be lots of can i ask you, are you guys looking at this . Are you guys analyzing the experience of nations who death tolls are dramatically less than the United States and asking yourselves what do we need to do better right now . Were still fighting covid19. What do we need to do better right now and prepare for the likelihood of future pandemics . Yes, sir. We have folks at the cdc in atlanta who do just that. As you mention south korea is a very different country than the United States, and in fact even there are laws that allow the government to theyre also similar to the United States. Densely urban but also fairly rural. But south korea is a country that has a lot of similarities to the United States including a very close working relationship. And i think all of us are going to have a lot to learn from the successes and failures of many countries including what weve done to the United States. So thats going to be happening for years on Something Like this thats at this massive of an impact. My time is close to the end and i dont want to go over, but mr. Chair i think a combined hearing between this committee will make a lot of things weve done to teach others, but theres an awful lot of things other nations have done and were having to prepare for future epidemics. We should be trying to learn those lessons as quickly as we can. Senator kaine, i couldnt agree with you more. It seems to me, though, that the answer to the question is relatively straightforward, and that is how tough does the government want to be as far as locking people up so they cant spread the disease . Thats a debate that probably is going to be pretty heated i would think depending on the culture of where you come from. But it needs to be explored. Theres no question about it. Because the question is are you do you want to go ahead as senator johnson and others have said, pointed out that if you compared this to the flu we go through this every year with the flu and we peak hits as a result of that. What are we willing to do in a pandemic like this and thats a very fair discussion. I think, mr. Chair, just to respond south korea is not a china or vietnam. So, yes, the government did some things, early testing and then if people are sick contact trace. Isolate and treat those who are sick. But by doing that and that was heavy Government Actiont they didnt have to shutdown the economy. So tough Government Action on the testing and Contact Tracing meant they need to do less dramatic action on shutting down the economy. And other nations are going to have other experiences, and then weve done things especially in our Research Institutions we can share with others. But i just think it makes my skin crawl to think of first case on the same day, similar tiny number of deaths in march and now 280 deaths in South Carolina and 120,000 in the United States. So i know we can do better and this committee was the Global Health subcommittee. Fair points across the board. I think also a person pointed out to me a the person that wearing a mask is in social interaction. This person also poined out culturally around the world there are people very comfortable wearing a mask, and in some countries i was told by this person whos an academic as far as these things are concerned that in many countries peemg wear a mask if they got a cold, if they got a cough. We never see that in our western civilization here and net another country thats the case. Youre right these things do need to further look at it. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. I believe theal World Health Organization failed the American People, failed the world during the coronavirus crisis. Eye made reference to some of this. From the start i believe the World Health Organization blindly accepted china leaders false reporting andina under std the spread of disease. January 14th we know they pushed out a false evidence they said of human to human transmission of the virus despite evidence to the contrary. But it continues. Just last week the World Health Organization announced asymptomatic spread of the coronavirus was rare, and that made the national and International Use for a day. And the next day they had to walk back the claim, so had to change things, lots of inconsisties. But this isnt the first instance of the failure to prevent and protect. I always thought the mismanagement of ebola and the delay in declaring it a National Emergency and i called them out publicly about it. Yfgt i believe it was in 2014. So due to the leadership failures and repeated mistakes i think its time to reconsider the role that the w. H. O. And leadership play. I agree with the withdrawing of the funding. Reforms are needed. I agree reformerize needed to ensure the accurate and transparent data sharing to our members. Other members of this Committee Said what leverage do you have after youve withdrawn the funding . You want the funding restored, you want us to come back and reengage, then give us the kind of and what do you see as the problem with the World Health Organization . Is it a lack of political equipment, a lack of capabilities . Why are they continuing to fail to implement needed reforms . Thank you, senator. I think i can take a little bit about some of the reforms we are discussing with other countries. And it goes beyond g7 Health Ministers as well. But also, you know, as i mentioned before this is not the first time. Weve experienced this before with the World Health Organization. In fact, i made mention to sars earlier when there were problems again in the west africa, ebola crisis. That led to more reforms, creation of the Emergency Program at w. H. O. The Obama Administration at the time actually had to redirect funding away from w. H. O. Because w. H. O. Didnt get its act together and accept the money. Thats what went on in those contraco things through private organizations. Theres a difference between the covid19 pandemic and how thats impacting the world and the west ebola crisis which is where were regionally focused. We have had encouraging conversations with other countries regarding the need for reform. I mentioned a few of those in my statement. And really you answered senator menendezs question better than i did, but the fact remains if w. H. O. Can get its act together and can make the reforms and can prove it has independence from china im sure theres every possibility that the relationship with the United States is could be changed. But the ball is in their court. And there are a number of reforms they need to undertake, and we have really remarkable amount of agreement and Common Ground with other Health Ministers that were dealing with on the need for reform. Notwithstanding our relationship with w. H. Oo. Thats beside the point. Can i ask about development of a vaccine . Can you please discuss the steps the administration is taking to engage with our Global Partners . Yes, sir. We have our own projects going on, operation warp speed, and other efforts going on globally. We have collaborations and conversations and share Lessons Learned and provide Technical Assistance to really all of these efforts. Were rooting for all of the efforts. Were going to need more than one vaccine and more than one company because were really going to need vaccinations for everybody on earth ideally and easy access to them. So there are a lot of Different Things in play. We had folks that their job is to work on these. Im happy to bring up some folks, technical experts and scientists who could speak with you and your staff. Were happy to do that anytime, but there are a number of initiatives going on and our department and the white house as well that theyre in discussions with, im assuming all of them. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator booker. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. It goes without saying this panic has hit the United States of america pretty significantly, and within that context my state of new jersey has seen the worst of this pandemic. And the lives lost, the face and dev staeting grief and the strug lds weve seen has been a legion. Im grateful it was already said in this committee that we have a serious problem at the time people were calling into question chinas secrecy. We have a time when a president was calling for prrns apparent. This pm was coddling them and encouraging them in numerous public statements, in numerous tweets, and we were failing as people in new jersey were dying. We were failing to hold them to account for the challenges that were before them. And so i continue to be concerned about our policies regarding china and they go beyond tough talk but to really working to get results. China appears during this crisis to have nationalized control of Domestic Production and International Distribution of crit sl personal equipment equipment in early 2020 in response to this crisis under their action of nationalizing their control china required factories that make masks on ehalf of American Companies in china to produce masks for its own domestic use. Now china is currently exporting more masks and these exparts seem to relate to political calculations with the u. S. Receiving less priority than other markets. Chinas mask diplomacy or the distribution of masks and medical equipment in order to curry favor has been widely reported. I would like to know how is china in your perspective, how is china prioritizing their exports of ppe, and how is the u. S. In your view benefitting or to the development of our country, and really the entire world so the images of our Health Care Professionals working without adequate ppe while we have we learned as a nn through the process in the event that another surge of the coronavirus hits and we find ourselves with heightened demands and needs for ppe . Im very concerned that this problem still is ongoing and that the chinese policies are still working at a detriment, at a significant detriment to the United States of america. And were not doing enough. So i would like a response from mr. Fs4 supply chain issue. Its a big issue, and thank you for raising that. Thank you. Mr. Richardson . Thank you, senator. I totally agree with you, and i agree with garrett. When you look at china, and i wouldnt just look at it in the context of covid, but if you look at their approach to foreign assistance generally, they have a really mi mercantilistic strategic approach to all of what they do. Theyre looking at strategic rights, strategic ports, theyre looking at bribing officials in order to get their Companies Access to things. Thats really the chinese approach to foreign assistance writ large, and i think it does set up a really great dichotomy between if you want to go with china and accept that type of assistance, youre going to go back sliding on your governance and your transparency, and its not ultimately going to be the most successful for any of our partners. I think what the u. S. Really offers with our partners, donor partners, offers really a different solution of transparency, no Strings Attached assistance, and those types of things. Its a critical issue. So im grateful, and i do not think were sounding the alarm enough. We see the authoritarian regime of china working against our country from current sea manipulation to corporate espionage and stealing secrets. We have seen this behavior consistently in how they deal with foreign relations. But now in the nature of a pandemic, it is chilling to see that their actions and what they are doing is putting lives in our country at risk in the past, right now, and especially within the potential for a second wave. Im grateful youre echoing, mr. Gregsby, what i have been saying in this committee, the in Small Business committee, the supply chain issues are National Security issues. And we need to be acting with bolder, far greater action to protect our nation from this menace that seems to be the chinese intention to undermine our safety, our health, and our wellbeing. I want to ask very quickly about wet markets, because i have great partnerships across the aisle, china cdc announced it found covid19 in samples collected in a wet market in wuhan, china, in january. Theres a new outbreak right now in beijing, but china yet again in this outbreak, we see that it is still linking a lot of the challenges to wet markets. These live wildlife markets were also linked to the 2003 sars outbreak. Scientists studying diseases, diseases that jump between animals and humans, have pointed to the close proximity of shoppers, vendors, in these markets, as being prime locations for the spread of these pathogens. And so we know from sars, which i mentioned, ebola, monkey pox, covid19, mrs, and more, jump from animals to humans. Its clear that wildlife markets that sell wildlife animals for human consumption need to be shut down. Senator graham and i sent a letter to the heads of International Organizations urging them to engage in efforts to shut down these markets. And so very quickly, and then ill stop, and love to ask this question to milligan and richardson, is how should the u. S. Work through International Organizations and International Wildlife community to increase the awareness of this risk and really to begin to take real measures to shut down and ban wildlife markets so that we do not see this challenge again . Im grateful to be working with senator cornyn, senator graham and others on legislation, but to me, this has got to be an international priority. I would love to get your thoughts on that. Yeah, thank you, senator. I appreciate those comments. State and usaid have robust programs when it comes to preventing wildlife trafficking, environmental programs, and we have a fairly broad reach, although a lot of the countries that are the greatest offenders like china, we dont have a lot of those types of programs in some of these countries. I do think we ned to expand not just in the development piece that chris will certainly have better insight in, but on the diplomatic side. We have to do a onetwo punch, but working together, we can make real progress. But chris. Thank you, and i think what this shows is that these issues are all interrelated. You cant just look at a Simple Health focus. Its interrelated. We have a tremendous opportunity now to build more commitment behind preventing wildlife trafficking by actually messaging and talking to many of the countries that enable this to happen about the consequences and the effects. This is a tremendous opportunity. Going back to the whole sanitation issue you raised up, were prioritizing many of our investments in water sanitation and hygiene particularly for that reason. We can prevent the spread of this disease as it goes forward. Senator booker, your point is well taken that these issues are all quite interrelated. But we have an important ability now to message strongly and show these connections which can help have a broader impact on these important issues such as cutting wildlife trafficking. Thank you. Thank you, senator booker, for raising the supply chain issue. Thats certainly something thats critical. This ties in a little bit with what senator kaine was saying, and that is that one of the things that south korea did, it had an all of government approach to this thing, and they shut down their supply chain out. They hung on to everything that they had. And whats happened in this is theres been a real underscoring of the weaknesses that we have as a result of a lot of our manufacturing going overseas. I think theres some of that manufacturing thats National Security and certainly Health Challenge is a National Security issue like nothing else. I have no doubt were going to be looking at that as we go forward, so thank you for that. Senator murphy. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. In response to a question about global vaccine efforts, mr. Grigsby said were rooting for these efforts. Ill maybe direct this question to mr. Richardson because it probably matters more what the secretary of state thinks about this than the head of the cdc. Why should we just be rooting for these global vaccine efforts . In fact, we could be part of these global vaccine efforts. In particular, there is one that is probably the most promising. Its seppi, the coalition for epidemic preparedness innovations. All our allies are a part of it. Its frankly doing work as we speak with u. S. Companies. The legislation that senator rish and i have would authorize the United States to become a partner with seppi and put money behind that effort. So whats the administrations specific position on the wisdom of joining this particular global vaccine effort . It just seems to be a lot smarter for us to be at the table so if seppi is the one that produces a vaccine, that we have something to say about where that vaccine goes and who gets it first. Yeah, i appreciate that, senator. Seppi plays an important role, certainly. Gavi also plays an important role. The Administration Just made the largest pledge ever for an American Government to gavi of 1. 6 billion. So i think our commitment to the International Effort for vaccines is pretty strong. I would say that if you look at what we have done, and a lot of this actually is on hhs side, but 4. 5 billion we have invested through barta, we have allocated 350 million for vaccine efforts. 1. 8 billion for rapid acceleration of diagnostics. I think there is a lot of work that has already been happening in the u. S. Am i going to say we shouldnt coordinate more closely with our partners and allies around the world . Of course we should. Thats a great commonsense approach. I will say, and i dont know if your question was leading to the eu conference before, but the u. S. Has invested private sector and public dollars, over 12 billion so far, into Vaccine Development and therapeutics. I dont deny were spending a lot of money on vaccine. My question is not whether were spending enough money. Its whether were better off hedging our bets and were joining these International Efforts. I hope the administration would be open to a bipartisan congressional legislation pushing us towards joining seppi. I think there is bipartisan support here. Mr. Grigsby, i did want to turn back to this question of the w. H. O. I do think its pretty stunning to hear from the administration that the problem early on was that the w. H. O. Was giving cover for china to withhold information about the vaccine, and senator menendez covered this, and so we dont need to belabor the point, but it was not that the president was simply saying nice things about china early on. On 40 different occasions, up to and including the month of april, the president of the United States was the primary global cheerleader for the chinese response to covid. He went out of his way over and over and over again to say great things about the chinese response. Here he is on february 7th, this is far after we all recognized that china was withholding information. He gets a direct question at a gaggle, are you concerned that china is covering up for the full extent of coronavirus . February 7th. He has an opportunity right here to say, yes, im concerned about it. They need to give us information. His answer is, no. China is working very hard. And ive got 20 pages of this from the president. And so it just belies reality to suggest that the problem was the w. H. O. Covering up chinas response. The president of the w. H. O. Is not more powerful than the president of the United States. And we all need to acknowledge that. My question to you is this, the idea that were going to try to affect w. H. O. Reform through the g7 is a new one. Can we at least just stipulate for the time being that it is harder for the United States to impact reform at the w. H. O. If were not a part of it, rather than a part of it . It might just be good for us to stipulate that. Whether or not youre going to try to pursue reform from the g7 or not, can we at least stipulate its more difficult for us to get the w. H. O. To reform if we have withdrawn from it . Thank you, senator. I think senator menendez or another senator had mentioned w. H. O. Is a member state institution. Our conversations with the g7 are important because its really representing the most significant influential donors to the World Health Organization. I would say that if w. H. O. And other countries, and other countries do not want to see the United States leave w. H. O. , theres no doubt about that, its important for w. H. O. To embrace these reforms and at the appropriate governing bodies meeting for Member States to take these reforms up and approve them. Theres one country that is desperate for the United States to leave the w. H. O. , and thats china. Theyre going to fill this vacuum. Theyre going to put in the money we have withdrawn, and even if we try to rejoin in 2021, its going to be under fundamentally different terms because china will be much more influential because of our even temporary absence from it, and any other construction of reality is just putting the United States in a very, very dangerous position. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I guess i would say to that, sir, that the u. S. Has been the most generous donor to w. H. O. , really since the beginning. Its been remarkable, the increase in chinas influence within w. H. O. , really over a long period of time. Thats been with the United States in w. H. O. And being the most generous contributor to w. H. O. So the president made a bold decision. Theres no doubt about that. Personally, i hope that it will get the attention of the leadership of the World Health Organization in that the scenario you just described will not come about. Thats my hope. I finally note, we were continuing to fund the w. H. O. For the last three years but we left our seat on the board vacant so it doesnt take a lot of imagination to figure out whew china was able to get more influence if we were sending money but not sending anybody to sit on the governing board. So we invited, listen, im not defending the fact that w. H. O. Has gotten closer to china, but we essentially invited the chinese to step in and fill the shoes of the United States given the fact that we werent sitting on that governing board. Senator, i actually have something to do with that. So i would like to respond to that. Im actually the alternate board member, and im sure i dont do nearly as good a job as the senateconfirmed person, but that seat was not vacant. I assure you, and in fact, the ambassador or his predecessor, the ambassador in geneva, theyre always there to fill that seat. And dr. Giroir was nominated 2017. So he was nominated a long time ago, and we sure do wish we would have had him confirmed sooner but he was just confirmed a couple weeks ago. He was nominated last year and had to be renominated again this year. I wont get into an argument over whether its more effective to have senateconfirmed positions ornot. I would obviously argue it is. Im well over my time. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator murphy. Mr. Grigsby, i can tell you ive got context with the w. H. O. , and your suggestion that our talk of withdrawing and withdrawing funds might get their attention, i can assure you it has gotten their attention. Its probably been your experience, too, but its clearly my experience. In any event, we want to look forward as opposed to backward, and were going to talk about that in a few minutes. Before we do that, senator cardin. Well, i hope im looking forward. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for holding this hearing. Let me thank all our witnesses for their service to our country. On Global Challenges, u. S. Leadership is indispensable. If were going have the type of outcome that in the interest of the United States and our security interests. This committee knows that best, so thats why i was very pleased to see were holding this hearing. Its through u. S. Leadership that we have a safer world, a more democratic world, and a healthier world. So many of us are very concerned as to how the United States responded to this Global Pandemic. We have seen inconsistent information coming out from the white house, and thats being kind to the president on a lot of the things that hes done in regards to this pandemic. We have not seen the type of preparation or response to the pandemic that would be used as a model for the world to respond. And i think senator kaine pointed out that pretty clearly in his questioning. This is not an isolated example of the Trump Administration in regards to Global Affairs. I could point to the immigration policy of this country, and i was very proud that the Supreme Court ruled the president s actions in trying to end the daca program was in their words arbitrary and capricious. But we also could talk about the president s trade agenda that initially put us at odds with our trading partners, our traditional trading partners rather than trying to isolate china. Or the United States pulling out of the paris climate agreement, the only country in the world, basically, to pull away from that. And now the pandemic. So my question starts off with the effectiveness of u. S. Global leadership on this pandemic. When other countries look at whats being done here in the United States, how much influence do we really have in the behavior of other countries . Because they look at whats happening in the United States, they see the president holding a political rally, bringing lots of people together against the advice of the Public Health officials, so how can we complain whats going on in other countries and my question is going to deal specifically with some of our largest countries in our hemisphere, who have at least publicly reported their cases of covid are very much underreported and they have not taken the steps that Public Health officials believe is necessary in order to contain the spread of covid19. This is our hemisphere, and we know this is a Global Pandemic. How much influence do we really have, and how much of concern are we with whats happening in our own hemisphere with other countries that are underreporting covid19 and have not taken the steps that Public Health officials believe are necessary in order to contain this virus . Senator, i can start that. I appreciate that question. You know, were really truly committed to the western hemisphere. I think we Just Announced another 250 million to be turned on for the northern triangle countries. Our commitment to columbia is unprecedented. Mexico im trying to limit this to covid19 if i can. And you might want to also point out the congress appropriated almost 2 billion of aid to deal with covid19. Can you tell me how much of that money is actually spent and where its been spent . We can go and look exactly at the obligations by not obligations. How much has been spent . Thats how much has been spent. Can you give me a range of that 2 billion, how much has been spent . Congress has appropriated 1. 6 billion for state and aid. I can speak to that piece. We have committed about 1. 3 billion. Of that, we have committed almost 200 million for the western hemisphere. You say committed. The money is actually out, being spent . We have identified which projects i understand you identified. How much of that has actually been actually spent . It gets down to the obligation rates, which usaid does their own obligations. Ill turn to chris to answer specifically, but in general, we have obligated almost over 500 i want to know how much has been spent. This is a global emergency. Time is critical. How much has actually been spent . So obligation equals spending. Its when we actually hand over the money to the implementing partner to do the work. And so thats the big picture, and then i can turn it over to chris if he has more details on specifically for western hemisphere, what the obligation rate is. I will say one thing. So each individual bureau and agency handles their own obligations rate. I can speak for the state department side. State department has obligated every dollar that we have identified that we want to spend on covid. So thats happening. Aid has a different mechanism and different approach to this, so i can let chris sort of elaborate. But i think, well, let me just do that. Chris, if you want to have this conversation. Thank you, senator. The easy answer from our perspective is usaid has put over a billion dollars into the hands of people overseas to respond to the covid19. That includes the portion of the supplemental were still continuing to put in peoples hands. How much of the supplemental has been spent . More than 50 of the portion we control. Why hasnt all of it been allocated . We have been allocating in tranches because the virus moves very quickly. And what we need to do is see where the virus is going and then move ahead of it and prepare and learn as we go. Do you need more money . Will you be requesting more money . We are busy obligating the money that we have. And were very thankful for the generosity of congress in this. We are not through this pandemic, and were learning a lot. One of the things im most concerned about, sir, are the secondary and tertiary impacts. Were seeing a big rise in food insecurity, were seeing a democratic backsliding, 1. 2 billion children out of school, were alarmed by genderbased violence. Theres a whole set of secondary and tertiary impacts well have to consider going forward. I ask that you keep our Committee Informed as to money actually spent, and the request for additional funds as you see the needs. Yes, sir. Absolutely, senator. Just to pick up on what chris mentioned. We have 35 billion thats being spent every year on foreign assistance. Much of it going to western hemisphere. We want to make sure that every dollar is spent in a covid sensitive way. How do we make sure that our genderbased violence programmi programming, our education programming, our Health Programming takes into effect whats happening with the virus right there, right then. And so its really important conversation. So its not just as chris mentioned, not just the supplemental. Were really trying to bring to bear all of our foreign assistance in order to help countries overcome this virus. Thank you. Let me follow up on senator cardins question. On the 50 of the money, supplemental money put out, has that been spent on the primary effects of covid or is some of it spent on the secondary and tertiary effects you have quite properly and considerately laid out for us . Its a mix. So congress has appropriated a certain amount of money for our economic support fund, which is really looking at that tertiary and secondary impacts. We also primarily most of our resources are coming in the form of both Global Health and humanitarian, which do focus more primarily on the actual virus and providing critical medical supplies, Training Health care workers, looking at best practices, those types of things. Thank you so much. Senator shaheen. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And thank you to our panelists. I would like to go back to china. Theres been a lot of discussion about china and their role in the hearing today. We have seen a concerted effort from china to counter any negative narrative that may develop in the International Media and within countries on chinas role in the pandemic, and i would say given the discussion this morning, they have been pretty successful. They have demonstrated a clear willingness to use their resources, including the manufacturing of personal protective equipment, to realign National Sentiments in countries that may otherwise be inclined to critically examine chinas response to the coronavirus. In fact, the center for strategic and International Studies released a report earlier this month that surveyed political elites across Southeast Asia and found that china is gaining ground on political influence and far outstrips the u. S. On economic influence in that region. So i have two questions for you really. One is, how does the lack of u. S. Leadership on the Pandemic Response create a vacuum that allows china to better develop that narrative where they are the provider helping countries with needed resources and expertise . And secondly, how does the pandemic contribute to this dynamic in Southeast Asia in a way that has a negative impact on the United States and our role . Im happy to have whoever wants to answer it. I can start and then i can pass it on. I mean, i just totally agree with your premise of the question. The reality is china has used this pandemic to advance their Strategic Interests around the world. As i mentioned earlier, it does need to be seen in the context of the larger efforts. I think we have a lot of work to do, especially in the Public Diplomacy side, to one, to counter misinformation and our Global Engagement center does a great job of doing that. Well, let me im sorry to interrupt, but let me just ask you, why do you think that is . Why have we been slow . Has it been some of the statements that were read from the president that suggest that we have been slow to recognize what was happening in china . No. Actually, i think what youre seeing is that the United States has outspent china time and time again, both in its everyday foreign assistance. China spends 400 million or so on foreign assistance, and were at 35 billion. Theyre just not a significant player when it comes to what we would consider to be effective foreign assistance. They spend all of their resources trooiing to build up strategic ports and to engage in bribery and other aspects. And so i think its an asymmetrical challenge from a development perspective, and we need to develop asymmetrical responses accordingly. And congress was really smart in the last years appropriations bill. They established whats called the countering china incentive fund. Were going to spend 300 million through a bottomup process, trying to develop best practices across the world to say, how can we effectively Counter China in djibouti and malawi and el salvador. Chinas influence has dramatically shifted, and the next battlefield is africa and western hemisphere, and we want to position ourselves in order to be able to be, one, the partner of choice always, and two, remind people of the everyday commitment we have been making to countries over the past 40 years. We have been there. We have stood with countries through thick and thin. As i said, we have invested 500 billion just over the past 20 years. Well, i agree with that, but a lot of that 500 billion has not been in humanitarian and Economic Development aid. Is it . When you are counting that 500 billion, are you not counting the military aid in that as well . So the way that our budgets work, about 25 of our foreign assistance is Security Assistance. And thats not just military. Thats also Law Enforcement and those types of things. 25 is Global Health, 25 is humanitarian, and 25 is everything else. So given that, why do you think we have not been more successful and china has been successful . I would like to i have been working in development for 30 years. Most of that time, i have been overseas, and yes, we have seen the quick increase in chinese influence, but were also seeing china is not now as successful in many terms. Theres a lot of buyers remorse, and more understanding that chinese investments come with Strings Attached. The supplemental that we are implementing has a very important Public Diplomacy side. That really shows american leadership, and countries overseas are turning to us and to our embassies for leadership on this issue. So can i im sorry to interrupt again, but im out of time, and i want to get an answer to the what has the pandemic done to allow china to increase its influence as opposed to our reaction globally to the pandemic, which does not seem to have produced a similar response to american aid . Yeah, thats a tough question, obviously, to answer. And we would have to go country by country to really determine every country is unique and how they approach it and how they think about chinese assistance. Most countries are willing to accept face masks or whatever from china, but to chris point, they often then go around to us and say, hey, is this Financing Deal from china any good . Were the trusted partner of chos choice, even though we have seen china really accelerate. If you look at their investments eve in covid versus what the u. S. Has invested, it pales in comparison. I think they are just really focused on getting those headlines. Well, let me just point out that the state of New Hampshire was able to get personal protective equipment from china when we couldnt get it from the United States or fema, so i think we need to examine whats happening there and what we could be doing better in order to address the fallout from the pandemic. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator shaheen. Now, the tough questions. If you guys were sitting here, each of you, one at a time, what would you do to construct a system for the future . Would it be to rehabilitate w. H. O. , to reform w. H. O. , to create a new division of w. H. O. . To restructure its management . Would it be to create a new International Agency . Would it be to use Something Else like cdc or what have you to construct the system as we go forward . I want to say senator menendez raised a very legitimate question about parallel spending in another organization. I think the last thing anybody here wants to do is to create more bureaucracy as opposed to an effective, nimble response to this in the future. And so give me your thoughts. I guess well go down the line. Mr. Richardson, youre up. Thank you, chairman. Whenever you deal with these challenges, i always want to make sure were thinking about what problem were trying to solve and what results that were looking for. The solution and the specifics about the solution will naturally come, and thats through the legislative process. The administration has yet to finalize its own proposal in this space. But let me say that a couple things. You know, first and foremost, having a really clear leadership and coordination function is essential. And as i said, coordination doesnt mean control. It means empowerment. We shouldnt be the state department should not be doing Global Health programming. That would be a terrible duplication of efforts. And really takes away from what cdc and usaid does. The state Department Also has global reach. It has embassies in nearly every country in the world. And it has a natural coordination function that is essential. The other gaps into the system that we have seen in both the domestic and International Systems is Data Tracking. Is builtin accountability. How do we create true accountability into the International System to hold countries accountable for not meeting minimum standards. How do we make sure that we are encouraging countries to use their own resources in a coordinated and systematic way that allows us to better share data to be able to create Early Warning systems. And how do we bring the very best of our private sector and the u. S. Government to Work Together . So those are a couple thoughts. Those are all good questions but not much of an answer. When the fire alarm goes off, who responds . The state department is the functional lead for Foreign Policy for the United States. How about for the world . For the world, sorry. The cdc is responsible for outbreaks. Our na i guess i would encourage how we can pull all of our expertise together in order to solve the problem. So the criticism has been made both in this committee here and for a long time, the w. H. O. Fell down on the job when it was obvious that there was something developing. Should they be the ones to undertake this in a fastmoving pandemic like this, or should there be a different abgency tht does that . That shines light on it, that attacks it . Who should do that . Look, the w. H. O. Has failed the world on multiple occasions. The last administration saw the same thing with the ebola crisis. We have now seen this with the covid crisis. You know, when this problem has been brought to us before, this is not the first time we had to think about can the w. H. O. Do hiv aids response, for instance. I think the world said no. It does what it does. But its not going to be nimble, dynamic, respect burden sharing, bring in private sector actors, and able to respond appropria appropriately with the highest levels of accountability. Last time the u. S. Led to create the global fund in order to do something on the hiv aids side. I think that looking at where are those strategic gaps in the multilateral space and how the u. S. Can lead with our friends and partners and folks around the world in order to strategically fill those gaps, that will be an essential part of that conversation. So is the global fund a model . I think the global fund is a tremendous model. Gavi is also a tremendous model. Theres a lot of things to be learned from lots of different options out there. I think the real key here is having worldwide reach, focusing on burden sharing. Right now, the u. S. Spends 40 of the worlds global Public Health work comes from the American People. You know, we dont want to back away from that, but as we take on this new challenge, we really need to surge in both private sector and other donorinize s i this space. Do you agree, mr. Milligan . Thank you, senator. When i think about the future, i think we need to think about how do we respond to the next pandemic and how do we prevent also as well an epidemic from becoming an pandemic, and how do we structure ourselves to effectively engage in that effort. We know in order to respond, we have to maintain a nimble and effective means to do so. We cant have overarching topdown bureaucratic bureaucracy engaging in that. We learned that the hard way. And we need to empower our people in the field at the country team level because thats where a lot of the true coordination and expertise comes due. Do you agree with mr. Richardson that the vehicle, good models for the vehicle, are the global fund and gavi . That depends, sir, because its a model for what . I dont mean to be cheeky. No. Fair enough. Because preventing is different than responding. And those are different skill sets and different attributes. When i consider about preventing, we know that a pandemic is not really a health crisis. Its a governance crisis. We know where we have epidemics today. We have them because of state fragility. Where is ebola today . Eastern congo. Why is polio still existing where it exists today . It exists in fragile states like parts of pakistan and south sudan. Many times an epidemic is really a governance crisis masquerading as a health crisis. We need to make sure we have an integrated approach. Senator booker talked about the link between wildlife trafficking and zoo namic crossovers. When we look at preventing, theres a level of coordination that needs to take place. We cant have a stovepiped health alone approach. It has to bring everything together. When we look at the response side, we have to maintain our nimbleness and our ability to actually engage in that International Effort at multiple levels. And what agency or what system, what do you recommend in that regard, again, for that part, when the fire alarm goes off and the Fire Department goes, who is the Fire Department . Its not we dont really have the global fund or the gavi set up to be the Fire Department. The global fund is responding to slowmoving epidemics. Is there no model then that exists for the Fire Department . The only model we currently have is the one that were suggesting needs to be reformed. Currently, when theres a humanitarian assistance crisis, and i have led many of our interactions in them, we work through the u. N. Cluster six ee. The u. N. Organizes the International Parts together. It works well for a regional stage, but now, we dont have a model for the pandemic stage. But we have principles that we need to incorporate. Flexibility, responsiveness, integrated approach, and one that brings the u. S. Government core capabilities that we share at this table into that together. Mr. Grigsby. Yes, sir. Thank you. I think jim and chris have stated it quite well. And i just want to thank jim and our colleagues at the u. S. Agency for International Development. We have worked very closely with them and the development of these ideas, we appreciate that. We do support the coordinator concept being in a nonimplementing agency. I would just point out that most of what were talking about is sort of foreign assistance related. Cdc, which would be the agency in hhs that would have the most to do in this area, its not a foreign assistance agency. It really is a Technical Assistance agency. It operates differently than usaid and in fact in different places. It does have 50 or 60 offices in developing countries, but it actually operates in every country on earth. So rich countries, poor countries, it has all sorts of collaborations. But are you suggesting cdc is the model for the Fire Department . No, not necessarily. It just depends on what kind of fire the trucks are going out to address, i guess. I mean, cdc is on point when it comes to the pandemics and disease outbreaks. Theres no doubt about that. It oftentime works very closely with u. S. Agency for International Development, particularly in a case in eastern drc is a great example where theres a disease outbreak and its happening in a part of the world where theres a war going on, and many other problems, and its by definition a complex emergency. We work hand in glove with usaid on that. So i dont know that theres a one size fits all sort of answer. Kind of case by case, but yeah. Well, thanks. I was hoping to get a clearer answer to the question of who is the tiFire Department, because thats what were trying to do here. I get all the moving parts. I understand that, but it seems to me that if there was a telephone number that somebody could call and say come and put out the fire, we want that agency. Right now, what youre suggesting is we give them a list of phone numbers to call, and im not sure that response senator, if i could be just very clear. There already is a number that countries call when they have a problem. Its our ambassador, and thats really where our worldwide reach is really essential. And then our ambassadors and chiefs of mission around the world, they naturally lean on the Technical Expertise depending on the challenge. I think this, as we start thinking about what the next pandemic looks like, is it fast moving . Is it slow moving . Does it hit the developing world . Does it hit the highincome country sies countries . How does it work . What are the responses we need to do . We just dont know. So making sure we have true coordination that can pull the right levers at the right time in order to get to results i think is essential. But i certainly wouldnt want to move away from the fact that we do have worldwide reach today. People know who to call. And thats our chief mission at the state department. And we want to just look to strengthen that capacity. If i could add briefly to that, i would say that our ambassadors, they are the mayors and the firemen is the office of foreign disaster assistance, which mobilizes rapidly throughout the world. Were currently responding to very, very complex humanitarian assistance all around the world and complex emergencies. From our u. S. Point of view, we have firemen, but i think your question, sir, was should there be and will there be an international fireperson. Thats what were looking for. Senator kaine, anything for the good of the order . Just to follow up, mr. Chair, on your comment and then one additional question. Ill put myself firmly in the camp on this in that i think we ought to stay in the w. H. O. And use our leverage to push reforms. An enormously frustrating organization, like every international organization. The u. S. Chose the senate actually chose not to put the u. S. Into the league of nations when president wilson urged after world war i that we do so, and the organization was ineffective. It was more ineffective because the u. S. Wasnt involved, but it was interesting during the 1930s, long before world war ii, fdr could see the league of nations collapse coming and basically said its been effective, but if it collapses, were going to need to recreate it if the world needs it, and started recreating for the u. N. , the plans were delayed, but eventually, it was carried through on. Recognizing the frustration, the u. S. Pulled out of the u. N. Human Rights Council for very legitimate reasons. A history of antiisrael bias and also a more broad history of hypocrisy. The member nations were fulminating about human rights and doing bad things. Whats happened as a result of us pulling out has it gotten better for israel . No, and things that the u. S. Advocated on the council that did become global priorities, for example, fighting against discrimination against looej loo lgbtq people, that wouldnt have been part of the Global Human Rights agenda if it werent for the United States. Those have gone sort of unaddressed or dormant with the u. S. Not there. I think these organizations are enormously frustratinfrustratin think it always goes worse for the world if the u. S. Isnt involved and i think it generally goes worse for us as well. So i like the president , whether its with nato or the w. H. O. , lean on them, demand more accou accountability, more strings have to be attached, but it goes worse for the world if were not there. Im so confident that the u. S. Always has such a value add to any organization that when we back away from it, a, they lose the expertise that we uniquely have, and worse actors elevate their profile in ways thats not good for us or anyone else. Heres the question i wanted to ask you quickly, and it follows up on a conversation i think you were having with senator cardin. Theres a New York Times piece in the last week about on the ground agencies feeling frustrated about the slow pace of the delivery of the march c. A. R. E. S. Act and other money, this 1. 6 billion out into the field. You have given us basically an awful lot of it has been committed. A big chunk of it has been obligated. I just want to understand this. And maybe well follow up in writing, but obligation means you puts it in the hands of the organization, the u. S. Is writing a check to an organization. Is that the same thing as getting to the field . Might some of the complaints of these ground level church world services, save the children, world vision, might their complaints be the u. S. Has written a check to somebody, but theres a middle man problem and its not getting down to the ground yet . Because this was a recent piece in the New York Times with groups named that were really frustrated. Whats the source of their frustration . How can we solve it . Senator, i think that the source of their frustration is they want to act as quickly as we want them to act as well. Without getting very bureaucratic, our different accounts have different abilities to spend money. We hear these concerns from these ngos, our important partners, with the humanitarian assistance funding we have, as soon as its available, they can begin spending it. We dont have to have a contract with them. We contract directly with them. We dont go through middlemen. As soon as its available. This is a unique ability we have with these funds. So of the 535 million in humanitarian assistance funding, they can currently spend 267 million and by july 17th, they can spend all of it. So that is in addition to the that is part of the overall funding that we made available, which is a billion dollars that we have made available, which is in their hands to do work now. We are looking at ways of actually streamlining the process. We are committed to fully obligate all this humanitarian assistance by the end of july. I have to tell you, these are extraordinary times. Previous to the Global Pandemic, we were running very large humanitarian assistance efforts in very difficult places like yemen, iraq, south sudan, and syria. And the Global Pandemic has also affected our own workforce as well. But we are adapting and were streamlining, and were meeting the challenge. Thank you. Appreciate that. Thank you, senator kaine. To our witnesses, thank you so much. You have been very patient with us, and this is a part of the puzzle that were trying to solve here. We appreciate your thoughts on it. We hope to hold a number of these hearings to try to get as much input as we can, and as a committee, sit down and try to construct a bill that is going to move us forward and that when this happens again, and i think we are all under the belief it is going to happen again, hopefully later rather than sooner, that well be more ready for it and hopefully well have legislation to address that. With that, thank you again for your service, and thank you for attending this hearing. Our committee is adjourned. More Live Programming ahead. Coming up at 1 00 eastern, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Democrats unveil a new infrastructure proposal. Watch that announcement live when it happens here on cspan3. President trump meets with the nations governors this afternoon to discuss reopening plans and efforts to help Small Businesses effected by the pandemic. Thats set to start at 3 00 p. M. Eastern, also live here on cspan3. And we might hear the president comment on the latest ruling from the Supreme Court, justices today rejected the administrations effort to end the Legal Protections for 650,000 young immigrants through the deferred action for childhood arrivals program. The Trump Administration had argued that the daca program is illegal and that courts have no role in reviewing the decision to end it. Read the entire decision at cspan. Org. American history tv, on cspan3. Exploring the people and events that tell in a hidden war, korea, 1950 to 53. And sunday at 4 00 p. M. Eastern. Real america features a series of u. S. Government korean war films starting with, to help peace survive, a 1974 Defense Department orientation film for soldiers assigned to south korea, and its a 7 00 p. M. On oral histories, u. S. Marine veteran alan clark on serving two tours in korea between 1950 and 1953. Exploring the american story, watch American History tv this weekend on cspan3. What do you think we can do about that . With police reform, protests and the coronavirus continuing to affect the country, watch our live unfiltered coverage of the governments response with briefings from the white house, congress, governors and mayors from across the country updating the situations. And from the campaign 2020 trail. Join the conversation every day on our live callin programish wall street journal. If you missed live coverage watch anytime ondemand, at cspan. Org. Or listen with the program app. Senator tim scott and other senate republicans